Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

4. To ask the Taoiseach the communication he had with Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan prior to his resignation. [19969/14]

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

5. To ask the Taoiseach if he had any communication with former Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan before his resignation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30902/14]

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 and 5 together.

I have already outlined to the House how the Attorney General brought matters of serious concern relating to An Garda Síochána to my attention on Sunday, 23 March and the actions I took as a consequence. On Monday, 24 March, I asked the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Equality to convey to the then Commissioner my deep concern about these matters and the fact that I would be reporting them to the Cabinet and the Dáil.

The Fennelly commission of investigation, which was established by the Government in April is currently investigating the sequence of events leading up to the retirement of the former Commissioner on 25 March, as well as the other matters covered in its terms of reference. I look forward to discussing the relevant issues fully in this House when the commission's report is available.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Fennelly commission was established by the Government to review the bugging of telephone conversations in Garda stations, as well as the background to and circumstances of a letter sent to the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality from the former Garda Commissioner on 10 March. The commission also has the task of investigating and reporting on the sequence of events that led up to the retirement of the former Garda Commissioner, Martin Callinan, on 25 March.

As part of the process of establishing that commission, the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality wrote to the Taoiseach to request that the terms of reference for the commission be amended. It wanted to ensure that the sequence of events leading to the resignation of the former Commissioner would be front loaded to the first eight weeks of the commission's work and that the evidence would be taken in public, if possible. The Taoiseach refused this entirely reasonable request. It would be useful to hear and understand his reasons for refusing. We then had what was described as a farce when the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality, Mr. Brian Purcell, appeared before the committee and refused to answer questions about his role in the events that led to the resignation of the former Commissioner. In the interest of fairness and trying to understand all of this, I ask the Taoiseach to explain to the Dáil why he refused the committee's requests to front load the first eight weeks of the commission's work and to take evidence in public.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not have the authority to direct any commission of investigation to do its work in a particular way. Obviously it is the responsibility and the right of the sole member to do as he or she might wish. It is true that the committee made a request that specific terms of reference be included for the commission of investigation regarding matters leading up to the retirement of the former Commissioner and to deal with the furnishing of a letter to the then Minister, which was sent by the former Commissioner on 10 March. These were the two specific requests from the committee. The Government accepted both of the requests and they are included as specific terms of reference for the Fennelly commission. It is not a case of refusing anything; it is a case of not having the right to direct the sole member to act in a particular way. It is, of course, open to the sole member to decide in what form and when he might wish to deal with any element of the commission of investigation. That is his right and I have no authority whatsoever to interfere in that. In respect of the request made by the committee, the specific wording requested has been put directly into the commission of investigation and I leave it to the sole member to follow that through.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The question put to the Taoiseach pertained to the role that he played in communications with the former Garda Commissioner prior to the latter's resignation. As the Taoiseach did not answer the question, can he tell us what was his role and what were the reasons for the communication? He knew that the Commissioner would have no option but to resign in view of the messages sent through the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality. Is it not true that the aim of the intervention was to secure the resignation of the Garda Commissioner and divert attention from the disastrous handling of many controversial issues by the then Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, and by the Taoiseach, in endorsing the huge misjudgments, mistakes and arrogance evident in the then Minister? Why did he choose 24 March to send his message when for weeks and, indeed, months before that he had stood over the actions of the Minister and the Garda Commissioners in terms of their abuse of whistleblowers who had attempted to bring irregularities to their attention and to the attention of the Government? Why did he chose that particular time when the issue about which he communicated the supposed concerns of the Government, namely, the secret taping of conversations in certain Garda stations, had been well known to Members of the Government for several months and was being discussed by representatives of the Government and the former Commissioner? Can he give us an explanation that is credible and in accordance with the facts? It is just a matter of confirming what everybody knows but it is important that the Taoiseach confirms it.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I disagree with the Deputy. I have already answered the question that was asked. I said that I was made aware by the Attorney General of serious matters relating to An Garda Síochána. These were brought to my attention on Sunday, 23 March. I outlined to the House on many occasions the actions I took as a consequence of that. On Monday, 24 March I asked that the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality would convey to the then Commissioner my concerns about what had been revealed to me by the Attorney General.

I disagree with the Deputy's assertion on what I had in mind because it is not open to me as Taoiseach to remove anybody from office. I do not accept his assertion in that regard at all. This matter was brought to the attention of the Attorney General by the updating process in regard to sensitive cases that had to be reported to Government. Clearly a discovery process was in train regarding an unsolved murder in Cork, in respect of which material to be discovered to the legal team of Mr. Bailey was to be sent to that individual on the Tuesday of that week, and the extent of what transpired to be the taping of conversations in certain Garda stations over an extended period, in terms of not knowing what was in any of these. In that sense, the available options were, first, to convey to the Commissioner my concerns about the material that had been presented to me by the Attorney General and, second, to hear from the former Commissioner what action had been taken in the meantime and what actions he was taking under his responsibility for the matter.

These were a number of options open to the Commissioner but in the following period, he announced his retirement. The material due to be discovered to the Bailey legal time was sent to it. Deputy Joe Higgins is aware that the Government previously commissioned both the Cooke and Guerin reports.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach indicates he does not have the authority to direct the commission and I accept that entirely, as it would be absolutely self-defeating if he had such authority. I may be in ignorance so perhaps the Taoiseach could put me right. When the Government establishes a commission, does it not set out the terms of reference?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is within the gift of the Government to set out terms of reference to deal with all these issues. My question was quite direct in asking the Taoiseach the communication he had with the former Garda Commissioner, Mr. Martin Callinan, prior to his resignation. The Taoiseach ignored that question and gave more information in response to the question asked by Teachta Higgins. Why does the Taoiseach not make a full statement on these matters here and clear up the issues? The Secretary General indicated he would not answer any questions about his role in these events after months of controversy and of arguing back and forth here and in the media. We saw undermining of whistleblowers and other citizens who put their heads above the parapet. Citizens see all this developing, with the Government taking its position and the Secretary General not answering questions before the justice committee.

I am not suggesting the Taoiseach has done anything wrong with this but I just want to be clear about what has occurred. When the Taoiseach indicates he looks forward to being asked to go before the commission, would it not be more simple to spell out, as I asked, what communication he had with the former Garda Commissioner prior to this resignation?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There was none, other than to say that when the information was brought to my attention by the Attorney General, as I indicated in the House before, I felt it only appropriate heading to a Cabinet meeting two days later that I should have the Garda Commissioner appraised of how seriously I viewed the report given to me. It was not for me to call the Garda Commissioner, as that would have brought a very different response. The normal method of communication would have been through the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I suggest it would have been through the Minister for Justice and Equality.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That would have been the normal method of communication and I wanted the Garda Commissioner to understand my concerns and to hear from him his proposed action. etc., in the knowledge I would attend a Cabinet meeting on the Tuesday morning. There was also the need for the information relevant to the taping in Garda stations and so on to be sent to discovery for Mr. Bailey's legal team.

It is the responsibility of the Government to set the terms of reference and they have already been published. The final term of reference is that the commission of investigation is "directed to conduct the task assigned to it under these terms of reference and to report to the Government no later than 31st December 2014, subject to section 6(6) of the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004." The terms of reference are clear and explicit. They include two specific terms of reference at 2(n) and 2(o) that were the formal request of the Oireachtas justice committee. The Government signed off on the terms of reference in consultation with the sole member and it will report to the Government by 31 December this year. It is a matter strictly for the sole member as to how the business of the commission would be conducted, including how the modules take place. I do not have any right or intention to interfere with any of this as it is not my area of responsibility. Specific terms of reference requested by the Oireachtas committee are included and have been accepted by the Government. There is a direction that the commission of investigation would respond by 31 December 2014.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will not impute any malintent from the Taoiseach in all of this and I take many of his points. We look forward to the commission reporting. Nevertheless, two issues arise. There was a meeting on the Monday night before the Secretary General was dispatched to the Garda Commissioner. Were there notes or a record of that meeting? The Taoiseach is on record speaking about the meetings concerned with the banking issue and he has expressed some concern about the lack of notes, as he described it. Were notes taken on that occasion, given the importance rightly attributed by the Taoiseach to the issues? This involved recordings at Garda stations and the appalling case of the Sophie Toscan du Plantier murder, which continues to hang over the country like a black cloud.

Does the Taoiseach accept that what is really at issue is public confidence in the system of government and the rule of law? There is a public view that the Taoiseach dispatched a senior civil servant to the Garda Commissioner with a message to take himself off the pitch.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A Cheann Comhairle, could I make the point?

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to get to the other questions.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Ceann Comhairle could give me 30 seconds.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It would be unfair to other Deputies.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no law, Standing Order or custom I can identify which prevents the Taoiseach from clearing the air with all of this and letting the public and Members know what happened.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are dealing with two specific questions.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have dealt with this up-front with Deputies Ó Fearghaíl, Adams and Higgins, as I have done on many occasions already. As somebody who will in due course be called before the Fennelly commission, I will attend both as a citizen and with respect to my responsibilities.

I know the Deputy does not intend any malice. I had a duty and responsibility when the level of revelation was brought to my attention. What was I to do? Would I do nothing, leave it aside when I attended a Cabinet meeting the following morning and not tell anybody I had been appraised of this? Would it not be natural to say that we should find out what has happened and convey concerns about the matter to the Garda Commissioner?

As I stated to Deputy Adams, the process of discovery was under way and all the material relevant to an unsolved murder in Cork and tapings in Garda stations, etc., was being transmitted to the legal team on the Tuesday, although the date was subsequently put back by a few days. I had a duty and responsibility to say I was concerned about the matter, have the former Garda Commissioner appraised of it and hear what action he was taking. That became obvious in the subsequent letter of 10 March. It is not a case of me not making a statement. That was the position. As somebody who will go before the Fennelly commission in due course, I will be happy to attend.